Advisory Panel on 

Streamlining and Codifying 

Acquisition Regulations

Volume 3 of 3

Summary of Recommendations
Volume 3 of the Final Report 

represents the culmination of 

more than 2 years of collective 

brainstorming, engagement, 

and intense research about how 

to change defense acquisition 

from an outdated, industrialera bureaucracy to a more 

streamlined, agile system able 

to evolve in sync with the speed 

of technology innovation. 

The Section 809 Panel has

recommended both evolutionary 

and revolutionary changes. The 

panel’s recommendations, in 

part, will allow DoD to make 

purchases in a manner similar 

to the way private-sector 

businesses do—which is difficult, 

and in some cases impossible 

under the current acquisition 

system. If implemented, these 

recommendations would reduce 

barriers that deny DoD timely 

access to innovative technology 

and creative solutions from 

nontraditional companies and 

bridge the technical superiority 

gap that is beginning to develop 

today between the United States 

and near-peer competitors and 

nonstate actors. 

To defend against potential

enemies, DoD must move to a war 

footing approach for acquiring 

and delivering capabilities to 

ensure warfighters have the tools 

they need. The DoD acquisition 

system’s ability to meet threats 

that exist today is questionable. 

DoD lacks flexibility the nation’s 

near-peer competitors have, 

limiting its ability to field 

innovative solutions before 

potential adversaries do. In 

deliberating its recommendations, 

the Section 809 Panel considered 

ways in which DoD still uses 

Cold War-era approaches while 

operating in a cyber-war-era 

society.

OVERVIEW

The 58 recommendations (and

associated subrecommendations) 

in this volume add to the 

35 recommendations (and 

associated subrecommendations) 

released in Volumes 1 and 2 of 

the Final Report and the five 

recommendations put forth in 

the Supplement to the Section 

809 Panel Interim Report. It has 

been no small task to tackle 

the formidable challenges 

facing the United States as it 

strategizes how best to defend 

its citizens and interests when 

the pace of technological change 

dramatically affects the nature of 

the threats the nation faces and 

the capabilities at its disposal. 

Ultimately, the Section 809 Panel 

aimed to make recommendations 

that allow DoD to deliver and 

sustain technologically superior 

capability inside the turn of nearpeer competitors and nonstate 

actors.
services that are readily available and 

readily available with customization. 

This approach will facilitate acquiring 

the most up-to-date products and 

services in the least amount of time 

possible from the open, accessible 

marketplace, including nontraditional 

and other private-sector suppliers.

Rec. 35: Replace commercial buying 

and the existing simplified acquisition procedures and thresholds with 

simplified readily available procedures for procuring readily available 

products and services and readily 

available products and services with 

customization.

Operating in a complex security 

environment with rapidly changing 

technology, the defense acquisition 

system must deliver a wide variety 

of warfighting and combat support 

capabilities as efficiently as possible. 

Not all capabilities are acquired in 

the same way, and DoD must adjust 

its acquisition processes to meet 

the demands of the diverse markets 

in which it operates. The Volume 

1 Report introduced a framework 

for optimizing how DoD operates 

across this dynamic marketplace. The 

Volume 2 Report further refined the 

Dynamic Marketplace Framework 

into three capability lanes and introduced the Section 809 Panel plan to 

develop the framework’s concepts 

into procedures and policy recommendations. DoD must be able to 

rapidly buy cutting-edge innovation 

for warfighters to use in addressing 

emerging threats.

The Dynamic Marketplace Framework is shaped by dividing what DoD 

buys into three categories. Defense-unique development includes 

DoD-financed development, either to 

repurpose a readily available product or solution or to develop a new 

product or solution, to deliver a defense-unique capability. Readily available includes any product or service 

that requires no customization by the 

vendor and can be ordered directly 

by customers, to include products 

and services that only governments 

buy. Readily available with customization includes products and services 

that are sold in the private sector 

for which customization, consistent 

with what is offered to existing private-sector customers, is necessary 

to meet DoD’s needs.

As set forth in the Volume 1 and 

Volume 2 Reports, reform is required 

for all three market segments in the 

Dynamic Marketplace Framework. 

Many of the recommendations in the 

preceding volumes, as well as in Volume 3, address issues related to defense-unique acquisition, as outlined 

in Section 1. For those items that can 

be purchased without development 

on DoD’s part, Section 1 puts forth 

a plan for purchasing products and 

SECTION 1: 

MARKETPLACE 

FRAMEWORK

Readily Available: Any product or service that requires no customization by the vendor and can be ordered directly by 

customers, to include products and services that only governments buy. 

Readily Available with Customization: Includes the products and services that are sold in the private sector, including 

to other public-sector customers, for which customization or manufacturing that is consistent with existing privatesector practices is necessary to meet DoD’s needs.

DEFENSE-UNIQUE DEVELOPMENT: DoD-financed development, either to repurpose a readily available product or 

solution or to develop a new product or solution, to provide a defense-unique capability.
SECTION 2: PORTFOLIO 

MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK

Portfolio management is a disciplined 

process that helps organizations optimize 

investments by prioritizing needs and 

allocating resources. Through portfolio 

management, all of an organization’s 

product investments are addressed 

at an enterprise level, rather than as 

independent and unrelated projects or 

activities. In a threat environment that 

is increasingly dynamic and complex, 

defense acquisition must deliver 

capabilities in an equally dynamic 

and effective way, and moving from a 

program-centric model to a portfoliobased model would meet this objective. 

DoD has previously struggled to adopt 

and implement the best practices 

of portfolio management. The main 

challenges to DoD transitioning to 

portfolio management include a 

fragmented governance structure, a 

lack of sustained leadership and policy, 

and a perceived lack of decision-making 

authority delegated to the appropriate 

level. 

Section 2 addresses all three of these 

challenges in its recommendations 

to establish an enterprise portfolio 

execution framework first introduced 

in the Volume 2 Report. The 

recommendations in this section offer a 

comprehensive, robust solution set for 

DoD portfolio management, expanding 

on portfolio best practices outlined 

by the Government Accountability 

Office (GAO). Section 2 provides 

specific recommendations related to a 

portfolio management framework at the 

enterprise and execution levels, including 

portfolio best practices. It also addresses 

a portfolio view for requirements and 

professionalizing the requirements 

management (RM) workforce, as well 

as establishing a sustainment program 

baseline and addressing issues related to 

sustainment funding.

Rec. 36: Transition from a programcentric execution model to a portfolio 

execution model.

Rec. 37: Implement a defensewide 

capability portfolio framework that 

provides an enterprise view of existing 

and planned capability, to ensure 

delivery of integrated and innovative 

solutions to meet strategic objectives.

Rec. 38: Implement best practices for 

portfolio management. 

Rec. 39: Leverage a portfolio structure 

for requirements.

Rec. 40: Professionalize the requirements 

management workforce.

Rec. 41: Establish a sustainment program 

baseline, implement key enablers of 

sustainment, elevate sustainment to 

equal standing with development and 

procurement, and improve the defense 

materiel enterprise focus on weapon 

system readiness.

Rec. 42: Reduce budgetary uncertainty, 

increase funding flexibility, and enhance 

the ability to effectively execute 

sustainment plans and address emergent 

sustainment requirements.

SECTION 3: IT 

PROCUREMENT

Due to the limited interaction 

between commercial and DoD 

information technology (IT) markets, 

the two now operate at substantially 

different paces of technological 

advancement. Because the commercial 

IT market has outpaced the DoD market 

for decades, DoD regularly acquires 

outdated and inferior technology, often 

at higher prices and slower rates. DoD’s 

slower acquisition pace has a direct 

effect on warfighting capability in a 

defense era defined by technological 

edge. Warfighters, and their support 

commands, are often operating with less 

functionality and at higher operating 

costs. This market segregation is caused 

by the vastly different way in which 

DoD and the wider federal government 

acquire IT. Rather than operating in the 

private-sector market of readily available 

options, DoD often creates detailed, 

intricate and unique requirements for its 

IT systems and services. 

DoD must acknowledge its acquisition 

system suffers from processes 

and procedures that are obsolete, 

redundant, or unnecessary and work 

to move quickly enough to keep pace 

with private-sector innovation. The 

recommendations in Section 3 offer 

strategies for transforming DoD’s IT 

acquisition from both the top down 

and bottom up. Strategic revisions to 

how DoD understands and acquires 

IT are integrated with smaller-scale 

changes that restore efficiency to 

routine processes that have become 

bogged down by layers of bureaucracy. 

None of the actions recommended in 

Section 3 alone will solve the challenges 

associated with IT market segregation; 

however, together they offer a series 

of changes that can better align DoD 

acquisition with private-sector practices. 

Allowing DoD to buy in a manner similar 

to private-sector companies will reduce 

barriers to sellers in the marketplace. 

Rec. 43: Revise acquisition regulations 

to enable more flexible and effective 

procurement of consumption-based 

solutions.

Rec. 44: Exempt DoD from Clinger–

Cohen Act Provisions in Title 40.

Rec. 45: Create a pilot program for 

contracting directly with information 

technology consultants through an 

online talent marketplace.

SECTION 4: BUDGET

In a very real sense, DoD must move to 

a war footing to maintain technological 

dominance—competitors already 

have—yet the budget-related issues 

described in Section 4 hamper efforts 

in that regard. Delivering capability to 

warfighters depends on integration of 

the budgeting process and authorization 

and appropriation of funds. The ongoing 

unreliable availability of new-start 

funding from fiscal year to fiscal year 

puts DoD’s mission at risk. Secretaries 

of Defense perennially identify this 

unreliability as the biggest risk to the 

nation’s defense. Current rules limit 

the flexibility of DoD’s acquisition 

workforce in dealing with the realities 

of the marketplace such that near-peer 

competitors and nonstate actors have a 

decided innovation advantage. 

Section 4 contains recommendations 

intended to reduce inefficiency and 

dysfunction in the defense acquisition 

system’s budget formulation and 

appropriations processes; however, 

the section does not include specific 

reforms to the planning, programming, 

or budget formulation processes. 

Instead, overarching goals of these 
recommendations include empowering 

DoD managers to reallocate resources 

between programs as needed; flowing 

down decision authority to the lowest 

possible levels; eliminating or mitigating 

some of the perverse incentives that 

exist in fiscal law; and mitigating the 

harmful effects of late funding on DoD 

acquisition programs.

Rec. 46: Empower the acquisition 

community by delegating below 

threshold reprogramming decision 

authority to portfolio acquisition 

executives.

Rec. 47: Restore reprogramming dollar 

thresholds to match their previous levels 

relative to inflation and the DoD budget.

Rec. 48: Increase to 50 percent the 

lesser of 20 percent restriction that 

creates artificially low reprogramming 

thresholds for smaller programs.

Rec. 49: Provide increased flexibility to 

the time periods within which contract 

obligations are permitted to occur.

Rec. 50: Enact regular appropriations 

bills on time.

Rec. 51: Mitigate the negative effect 

of continuing resolutions by allowing 

congressional regular appropriations 

to remain available for a standardized 

duration from date of enactment.

Rec. 52: Permit the initiation of all 

new starts, provided Congress has 

appropriated sufficient funding.

Rec. 53: Permit the initiation of all 

production rate increases, provided 

Congress has appropriated sufficient 

funding.

Rec. 54: Permit the initiation of multiyear 

procurements under a CR.

Rec. 55: Raise the Prompt Payment Act 

threshold.

Rec. 56: Use authority in Section 1077 

of the FY 2018 NDAA to establish 

a revolving fund for information 

technology modernization projects 

and explore the feasibility of using 

revolving funds for other money-saving 

investments.

Rec. 57: Modify fiscal law to extend the 

duration of when funds cancel from 

5 years to 8 years in expired status to 

align program acquisitions with funding 

periods and prevent putting current 

funds at risk and to support meeting 

appropriation intent.

Rec. 58: Address the issue of over-age 

contracts through (a) establishing an 

end-to-end, integrated, streamlined process, (b) codifying DCMA’s Quick Close 

Out class deviation in the DFARS, and (c) 

extending DCMA’s Low Risk Quick Close 

Out initiative by 2 years. 

SECTION 5: ACQUISITION 

WORKFORCE

As the rapid transformation of the 

defense acquisition system continues, 

DoD will require a professional, talented, 

experienced, flexible, and broad-minded 

workforce to succeed on warfighters’ 

behalf. Career management is a critical 

element for the acquisition workforce 

(AWF), and the recommendations in 

Section 5 concentrate on workforce 

development issues. In this chapter, the 

Section 809 Panel proposes a series of 

changes to DoD’s career development 

framework for AWF members. 

Continued on next page.
The recommendations in Section 5 

revolve around three crucial aspects 

of career development: qualifications 

as opposed to certifications, career 

paths for all acquisition career fields 

with a competency model for the entire 

workforce, and public–private exchange 

programs (PPEPs). The current threelevel certification system, established by 

DoD 3 decades ago, leads to early-career 

workforce members who are certified, 

but not necessarily qualified. This 

system lacks clear-cut career paths and 

a competency model to help workforce 

members identify a clear career 

trajectory and then gain the right skills 

to navigate that path. Additionally, the 

system lacks successful opportunities 

for public–private exchange programs 

that could help acquisition leaders 

enhance their knowledge. Addressing 

these shortcomings will ultimately lead 

to a workforce that is better equipped 

to navigate the global macro-business 

environment and embolden appropriate 

risk-taking skills.

Rec. 59: Revise the Defense Acquisition 

Workforce Improvement Act to 

focus more on building professional 

qualifications.

Rec. 60: Implement acquisition career 

paths that are integrated with an 

institutionalized competency model 

tailored to mission needs.

Rec. 61: Create a comprehensive public–

private exchange program for DoD’s 

acquisition workforce.

SECTION 6: 

STREAMLINING AND 

IMPROVING COMPLIANCE

DoD is not a typical private-sector 

buyer; complying with its many layers 

of requirements is burdensome for 

both DoD and contractors. Federal 

procurement law, federal acquisition 

regulations, and DoD’s internal 

regulations combine to create a 

labyrinth of challenges to the acquisition 

workforce, in both the public and 

private sectors. The recommendations 

in Section 6 acknowledge that DoD’s 

processes and procedures are outdated, 

creating barriers to entry for prospective 

industry partners and that a compliancedriven culture needs to be recalibrated 

to address the body of laws and 

regulations in a more efficient way. 

Section 6 addresses a variety of topics 

under the compliance umbrella. 

Included among these topics are 

subcontracting clauses that are 

flowed down from prime contractors 

to their suppliers, socioeconomic 

policy objectives unrelated to contract 

requirements, bid protests, the 

Inventory of Contracted Service, and 

adapting to commercial financial 

auditing practices. Making changes in 

these areas would alleviate some of 

the unnecessary burdens of the current 

compliance requirements, reduce the 

barriers to doing business with DoD, 

reduce the lengthy bid protest process, 

and optimize the auditing process.

Rec. 62: Update the FAR and DFARS to 

reduce burdens on DoD’s commercial 

supply chain to decrease cost, prevent 

delays, remove barriers, and encourage 

innovation available to the Military 

Services.

Rec. 63: Create a policy of mitigating 

supply chain and performance risk 

through requirements documents.

Rec. 64: Update socioeconomic 

laws to encourage purchasing from 

nontraditional suppliers by (a) adopting 

exceptions for DoD to domestic 

purchasing preference requirements for 

commercial products, and (b) adopting a 

public interest exception and procedures 

for the Berry Amendment identical to 

the ones that exist for the Buy American 

Act.

Rec. 65: Increase the acquisition 

thresholds of the Davis–Bacon Act, the 

Walsh–Healey Public Contracts Act, and 

the Services Contract Act to $2 million.

Rec. 66: Establish a purpose statement 

for bid protests in the procurement 

system to help guide adjudicative bodies 

in resolving protests consistent with said 

purpose and establish a standard by 

which the effectiveness of protests may 

be measured.

Rec. 67: Reduce potential bid protest 

processing time by eliminating the 

opportunity to file a protest with the 

COFC after filing at the GAO and require 

the COFC to issue a decision within 

100 days of ordering a procurement be 

delayed.

Rec. 68: Limit the jurisdiction of GAO 

and COFC to only those protests of 

procurements with a value that exceeds, 

or are expected to exceed, $75,000.

Rec. 69: Provide as part of a debriefing, 

in all procurements where a debriefing 

is required, a redacted source selection 

decision document and the technical 

evaluation of the vendor receiving the 

debriefing.

Rec. 70: Authorize DoD to develop a 

replacement approach to the inventory 

of contracted services requirement 

under 10 U.S.C. § 2330a.

Continued on next page.
Rec. 71: Adopt the professional practice 

guide to support the contract audit 

practice of DoD and the independent 

public accountants DoD may use to 

meet its contract audit needs, and direct 

DoD to establish a working group to 

maintain and update the guide.

Rec. 72: Replace 18 system criteria 

from DFARS 252.242-7006, Accounting 

System Administration, with an internal 

control audit to assess the adequacy of 

contractors’ accounting systems based 

on seven system criteria.

Rec. 73: Revise the definition of business 

system deficiencies to more closely 

align with generally accepted auditing 

standards.

SECTION 7: SIMPLIFYING 

PROCUREMENT AND 

CONTRACTING

The topics addressed in Section 7 

vary across the range of defense 

acquisition practices, yet they all aim 

to streamline defense acquisition 

regulations and return time and 

flexibility to the acquisition workforce. 

These recommendations undertake 

streamlining in one of four ways: 

decluttering excess documentation 

requirements or procedures; utilizing 

existing authorities in a more efficient 

way; removing rigidity; or clarifying 

definitions. Regulatory decluttering is 

a constant challenge for DoD; these 

recommendations take aim at improving 

some particularly timely and important 

acquisition issues.

address eliminating duplicative or 

non-value-added documentation 

requirements, using existing authorities 

and processes to greatly reduce burden 

in the field, removing the rigidity 

of the regulatory system in specific 

circumstances, allowing energy to be 

purchased in a manner more consistent 

with the private sector, encouraging 

use of advanced payments to finance 

small business contracts, modernizing 

the Armed Services Board of Contract 

Appeals, and clarifying regulations 

related to commercial preference and 

use of Other Transaction authority. 

These regulatory adjustments have the 

potential to reverberate across DoD 

and to deliver great efficiencies to the 

acquisition workforce. 

Rec. 74: Eliminate redundant 

documentation requirements or 

superfluous approvals when appropriate 

consideration is given and documented 

as part of acquisition planning.

Rec. 75: Revise regulations, instructions, 

or directives to eliminate non-valueadded documentation or approvals.

Rec. 76: Revise the fair opportunity 

procedures and require their use in task 

and delivery order competitions.

Rec. 77: Require role-based planning 

to prevent unnecessary application of 

security clearance and investigation 

requirements to contracts.

Rec. 78: Include the supply of basic 

energy as an exemption under FAR 

5.202.

Rec. 79: Enable enhanced use of 

advanced payments, at time of contract 

award, to small businesses.

Rec. 80: Preserve the preference 

for procuring commercial products 

and services when considering small 

business set-asides.

Rec. 81: Clarify and expand the authority 

to use Other Transaction agreements for 

production.

Rec. 82: Provide Armed Services Board 

of Contract Appeals authority to require 

filing of contract appeals through an 

electronic case management system.

Rec. 83: Raise the monetary threshold 

to provide agency boards of contract 

appeals accelerated, small business, and 

small claims (expedited) procedures to 

$250,000 and $150,000 respectively.

SECTION 8: 

GOVERNMENT–INDUSTRY 

INTERACTIONS

Communication is key to harnessing 

private-sector technology in a complex 

regulatory environment. For DoD to 

regain strategic overmatch and achieve 

goals set out in the National Defense 

Strategy, Congress must mandate that 

the defense acquisition workforce and 

the private sector improve the way 

in which they exchange information 

and communicate needs. Without 

appropriate communications with 

industry, warfighters are likely to receive 

more costly, less advanced equipment 

later than desired. A culture of open 

communication would allow the entire 

acquisition workforce to identify 

innovative capabilities, share best 

practices, learn from mistakes, and align 

missions among buyers and sellers in the 

marketplace. Such a culture would also 

allow the federal government and its 

contractors to better understand each 

other’s needs, constraints, and areas 

for confluence all focused on delivering 

capability to warfighters inside the turn 

of DoD’s near-peer competitors.
Section 8 focuses on DoD’s communication with contractors and potential 

contractors. In many cases, the FAR and 

other regulations allow for more interaction with industry than is common 

practice. The following recommendations offer specific ways in which DoD 

can better communicate with industry. 

The recommendations in Section 8 work 

together in an effort to foster behavior 

that values interaction with industry and 

reduces fear of missteps and risk-taking 

normally associated with interacting 

with marketplace. 

Rec. 84: Direct DoD to communicate 

with the marketplace concerning acquisition from development of the need/

requirement through contract closeout, 

final payment, and disposal.

Rec. 85: Establish a Market Liaison at 

each procuring activity to facilitate communication with industry.

Rec. 86: Encourage greater interaction 

with industry during market research.

Rec. 87: Establish a market intelligence 

capability throughout DoD to facilitate 

communication that enhances the government’s industry knowledge through 

open, two way communication.

SECTION 9: 

ACQUISTION DATA

For several decades, DoD has worked to 

more effectively use enterprise acquisition and financial data in forming 

decisions. This process involves enormous technical complexity, and requires 

institutional improvements to accompany any IT upgrades. DoD does not lack 

this type of data, but rather lacks the full 

capacity and capability to use information systems to access data and provide 

for standardized data architectures. The 

recommendations in Section 9 aim to 

address these inadequacies. 

Rec. 88: Use existing defense business 

system open-data requirements to 

improve strategic decision making on 

acquisition and workforce issues.

Rec. 89: Direct DoD to consolidate or 

eliminate competing data architectures 

within the defense acquisition and financial system.

SECTION 10: TITLE 10 

REORGANIZATION

The acquisition-related statutory provisions that apply to the rest of the federal 

government were recently recodified in 

Title 41. No similar effort has been made 

with regard to Title 10, where the organization of the acquisition-related statutory provisions has become problematic. 

Reorganizing defense acquisition statutes into a cohesive structure provides 

a long-term benefit to the acquisition 

community and those companies doing 

business with DoD or seeking to enter 

the DoD marketplace. Section 10 addresses the need to reorganize Title 10, 

so it is easier to locate key acquisition 

statutes, many of which are currently 

hidden within note sections of the code.

Rec. 90: Reorganize Title 10 of the U.S. 

Code to place all of the acquisition provisions in a single part, and update and 

move acquisition-related note sections 

into the reorganized acquisition part of 

Title 10.

SECTION 11: FAR 

REFERENCE DOCUMENT

The FAR and DFARS provide the primary 

regulatory framework by which the federal government and DoD respectively 

contract for supplies and services and 

implement pertinent statutes, policies, 

and Executive Orders (EOs). It is difficult 

to effectively navigate and understand 

the regulations, which prevents acquisition personnel from leveraging the 

flexibilities, methods, and authorities 

available to maximize speed in the acquisition process and encourage innovation, competition, and investment by 

the private sector. Section 11 highlights 

the problems with navigating FAR and 

DFARS requirements and recommends 

a resource that would make researching 

related statutes, policies, EOs and FRNs 

easier for government and private-sector acquisition team members.

Rec. 91: Require the Administrator of 

General Services and the Secretary of 

Defense to maintain the FAR and DFARS 

respectively, as electronic documents 

with references to the related statutes, 

Executive Orders, regulations, and 

policies, and with hyperlinks to Federal 

Register Notices.

SECTION 12: MINIMIZE 

FLOWDOWN OF 

GOVERNMENT-UNIQUE 

TERMS IN COMMERCIAL 

BUYING

Currently the FAR and DAR Councils 

hold the authority to determine if 

procurement-related statutes, Executive 

Orders (EOs), or regulation should 

apply to commercial buying. Recently, 

Congress has mandated that the councils 

conduct comprehensive reviews of all 

the procurement-related statutes, EOs, 

and regulations and determine which 

government-unique terms should flow 

down to the acquisition of commercial 

products and services. The FAR and 

DAR Councils have proven constrained 

in their ability to reduce the number 

of government-unique terms required 

to flow down. Section 12 reiterates 

the need for Congress to take the 

lead in minimizing the governmentunique terms applicable to commercial 

buying, which was first addressed in 

Recommendation 2.

Rec. 92: Minimize the flowdown of 

government-unique terms in commercial 

buying by implementing the Section 809 

Panel’s Recommendation 2.

SECTION 13: CENTER FOR 

ACQUISITION INNOVATION

Pursuant to its congressional authorization, the Section 809 Panel will complete 

its work and cease to exist on July 15, 

2019. The need to identify challenges 

associated with the DoD acquisition 

system will continue to exist, as will 

the need to propose policy alternatives 

for addressing those challenges. The 

need exists to maintain the Section 809 

Panel’s records for future research and 

to create a center for acquisition policy 

research that continues the work of 

reforming DoD acquisition. Section 13 

addresses these issues.

Rec. 93: Create a Center for Acquisition 

Innovation located at the National Defense University, Eisenhower School. 

For detailed analysis, see the Section 

809 Panel’s Volume 3 Report at 

section809panel.org